Comments

The trouble with those KDE/Gnome surveys is that when some people hear about them they turn it into a contest, and tell everyone in #gnome or #kde to go and fill it in, and write about it on their blog.

I was one that didn't belived the default option for distros would make people choose gnome after KDE or vice-versa, but now I see every day some friends trying out Ubuntu or Fedora, and they don't even know what KDE is.

There isn't something wrong with that, the distros are free to do anything they want, they can even exclude KDE. There was a lot of complain of distros not giving gnome a chance, but now it seems the game is turning, so the question is:
Isn't there anything we can do to make distros give KDE more importance?
Do the distros have the GPL in KDE so much and love the LGPL in gnome?

Maybe we could contact distros to see what we could do to make them like KDE more.

>But it would be great if SuSe would recover from the hostile takeover.

1st, Suse was not a hostile takeover. It was properly sold.
2nd, Novell allowed the 2 groups to battle it out and the GNOME group appears to be winning at this time.

But I agree with the original poster. It would appear that distro's pushing a default of GNOME will come to haunt. Basically, it is the same principle as Windows. You get the most out there and ppl get locked in.

The battle is, who is in control. Gnome is in control. For instance, they have moved yast to GNOME. In addition, they have moved from KDE being the default to GNOME. This is a battle of attrition. Slowly but surely, they count on gaining a bit at a time. That is why when the SuSE CEo left, he was wicked to the gnome guys.

In the eyes of all Gnome users I've met, a GTK program is a Gnome program. It's not true of course, but it's just the way it is.

And it's just a matter of time before KDE gets dropped (or abandoned, even if they keep including it) from Suse. Do you think they're going to pour resources forever into two different environments and duplicate all their work? Of course not. SLED shows this is the direction Novell is going to take.

If you think I'm spreading FUD, just wait. I personally think KDE is the one that should succeed since is far, far superior to Gnome, but we all know in the real world things are often not as they should.

Hey, me too. Maybe even Linux. Don't know if something like FreeBSD will suit my needs, but I would give a try if this situation really happens, as I fear it will. The only thing I know is I want to use KDE, I don't really care much about what's running behind the curtains.

Me too. But, If the OS doesn't matter for us, just the desktop, then, why don't use our own, KDE specific, application packaging and distribution method?, that's the only thing that kde lacks of ... but maybe that is getting too near to gnustep, isn't it?

«In the eyes of all Gnome users I've met, a GTK program is a Gnome program. It's not true of course, but it's just the way it is.»

Actually, I find it to be true. Gnome base library is pretty much just an extension of GTK+, while the KDE base library actually enhances Qt. So, if it follows the Gnome HIG and uses Gnome libraries where it makes sense (eg. an audio player should use GStreamer rather than say Alsa), it is a Gnome application.

> And it's just a matter of time before KDE gets dropped (or abandoned

FUD

> Do you think they're going to pour resources forever into two different environments and duplicate all their work? Of course not.

The irony is that Novell is really putting resources into duplicated work - on the GNOME side. They developed F-Spot and Banshee while already the best photo manager and music player existed with Digikam and Amarok available for free from the community for KDE. So when they want to remove "duplicate work" then there is nothing to cut on KDE side.

> SLED shows this is the direction Novell is going to take.

SLED shows that Novell has committed to provide support for its KDE for the next seven years.

> The irony is that Novell is really putting resources into duplicated work - on the GNOME side

Of course, because they've chosen GTK for their enterprise distribution and it had a long way to catch up with KDE. Nothing makes me think once they get there and actually start innovating in the GTK side they will bother to duplicate that work in KDE. Why do I think so? Because spending your resources into two different platforms is just a waste, it doesn't make sense.

> SLED shows this is the direction Novell is going to take.SLED shows that Novell has committed to provide support for its KDE for the next seven years.

No, if anything, it shows that with the product they intend to make money with they're going fully GTK, and they're sending a very clear message about it.

novell recently created kde-applications like kerry and knetworkmanager.
They also are busy creating a totally new k-menu (similar to the gnome one in SLED). And there is probably more KDE related stuff in the hood of Novell that we might see in the future.

Those aren't actions I would expect from a distribution that wants to abandon KDE

"The irony is that Novell is really putting resources into duplicated work - on the GNOME side. They developed F-Spot and Banshee while already the best photo manager and music player existed with Digikam and Amarok available for free from the community for KDE."

They did that because they looked at Digikam and Amarok and thought "Shit, we'd better do something". The fact that Digikam and Amarok exist without Novell having to start projects to initiate them is testament to which desktop environment has the better development framework and where they should really be heading ;-).

Surely Novell is investing in Gnome and related tech big time, but I still feel there is a good commiteement towards KDE (not sure if as good as before though). The OpenSuse community and the distribution they build is pretty much KDE oriented btw.

About Yast-GTK, I don't find it as pointless. Integrating setup tools make a lot of sense; the user should expect to find Yast tools together with the desktop control center and well integrated, not think about them as an application. There are also other reasons why you would want to make a new fronted. Yast-Qt has some unnecessary complex interfaces and the code is not any prettier. For reference, Yast-Qt and -GTK package selectors:http://rpmcruz.planetaclix.pt/trash/package-selector-qt.pnghttp://rpmcruz.planetaclix.pt/trash/package-selector-gtk.png
Of course I am biased because I am the SoCee guy doing it. :) (and yep, it's not a Novell effort at all. And all other Summer of Code projects were given to KDE stuff btw.)

"Of course I am biased because I am the SoCee guy doing it. :) (and yep, it's not a Novell effort at all."

Well, if Novell are 'going Gnome' then they're even dafter than I thought. You would have thought 'they' would have at least put in an effort to port Qt YaST to looking right under Gnome, or something similar.

The poll was advertized on Ubuntu Forums (gg:ubuntuforums survey) despite being asked to "refrain from promoting or advertising the survey to mailing lists, or encouraging friends or co-workers to vote for specific software" so don't be surprised about high Ubuntu and GNOME numbers.

Me too, specially experienced user going from slackware to ubuntu and new ones beggining with ubuntu. The former know there are other things out there (read: KDE), latters don't, and they are the future (that is, the mass).
Anyway, this year's poll at linuxquestions, show different results:http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/forumdisplay.php?f=69
Nevertheless, there is a common point, gnome is gaining moment.

My impression is, that KDE has an increasing momentum. Amarok, K3b, Kontact, Digikam, KOffice since 1.4, ... just to name what comes to my mind. All those applications are great and even many GNOME-users use them.
You are right that GNOME finally takes greater steps forwards (thanks for Novell pushing very hard). But that doesn't mean KDE is "loosing".
KDE is more alive than ever, and it surely has a very bright future

"I was one that didn't belived the default option for distros would make people choose gnome after KDE or vice-versa, but now I see every day some friends trying out Ubuntu or Fedora, and they don't even know what KDE is."

Relax! It's not like KDE is like an endangered species.
In my opinion, the transition to KDE4/QT4 is the reason for the current lesser attention. KDE 3 doesn't get the love it was used to, while KDE4 is far from release. So what do you expect?

*** warning! playing armchair strategist can lead to panic attacks ***

.. that and too many people try and measure things by the buzz dejour of the community (which usually boils down to cults of personality and the volume of one's voice) versus the reality of usage in the real world.

here's kde's quick reality tally:

- our developer community is growing
- our user community is growing
- our public exposure is growing

if that's so, in what ways is KDE having problems again? ;)

the idea that "gnome is the measuring stick of kde and vice versa" is really not useful. what -is- useful is to compare kde against itself:

- are we growing?
- if so, faster or slower than global the desktop market is growing?
- what can we do to increase our growth by increasing our exposure and usage?

and no, we don't have to (nor should we, imho) try and mimic (or discount out of hand) what gnome does to answer that last question. we must chart a map that works for who we are and what we do. the two projects have historically had different methods of creating, sustaining and supporting growth which reflects differences in personalities and goals. currently both strategies are working (huzzah for free software!) and switching to something that doesn't resonate with our unique core values ("that which is KDE") would not be progressive for the project.

added to that, the answer to increasing exposure and usage often includes an element of working with other free software projects including gnome and gnome-friendly people.

in summary:

gnome is not our competition. microsoft and apple are.
we do not need to best gnome, we need to best ourselves.

Yes, I do agree, the problem isn't gnome, I belive.
The problema is that, for some reasons, distros are placing gnome as defult option. I wanted to know the reasons for this, so maybe we could push for KDE being at least a option in the same level as gnome.
You see, for years gnomers complained about distros using too much KDE, maybe it's your turn to look for more usage on distros?

Anyway, my intention wasn't create a trollwar, maybe the KDE EV group is already doing something about it and I just don't know. Or maybe simply we should not care about distros default, and go ahead.

>>The problema is that, for some reasons, distros are placing gnome as defult option.

So what's new?
redhat/fedora have always placed gnome as default option(with kde as alternative), and ubuntu is the first popular distro that uses gnome as only environment (comparing with kde: linspire, lycorish, xandros, pardus, etc. all ship with only kde as desktop).
And even ubuntu could not stop kde: within short time, kde was available as alternative on gnome, and has now its own playground with kubuntu.

Agree with most, but would correct:
Proprietary software with closed specifications is our competition.

Microsoft and Apple only so far, as they still tend to believe in that crap. That day they are getting it there will be no more hard competition, but happy coevolution for the best solutions. Apple here even already might have a chance to get the twist why we want more control of our systems (ignoring that DRM business here).

However, there is another battle that, in my opinion, needs to be faced : gaining momentum on the professional side.
It is clear that KDE is very strong in the desktop-linux arena, and as you pointed out its aim is to grow in the desktop-computer arena. But this battle can only be won if KDE manages to get enterprise support. Unfortunately nowadays, as I see the situation, managing to get enterprise support means fighting against gnome - and not (yet) apple nor windows.
Why is Gnome being so attractive for linux businesses ? Why are all the biggest linux players mainly focusing on gnome and putting their bucks there ?
I am not a linux insider and my opinion is probably biased by unconsistent communication, but as far as I see and fear, desktop linux is slowly getting de-kde-ified.

I totally agree, KDE will keep going as long as it stays KDE. If it tried to be 'gnomish', it would simply fail and Gnome would overtake its users ("why use a copycat when we have the original?"). KDE people use KDE because it is what it is. Simple as that.

Besides, as long as KDE exists and is getting better all the time (and I'm sure KDE4 is going to seriously ROCK!), what the problem? I don't care the slightest what everyone else uses as long as I can use what I prefer.

Isn't it Fedora who is losing momentum for the welware of Ubuntu? So it's just GNOME users shifting from one distro to the other. And many lately rising distros use and ship only KDE: PCLinuxOS, Mepis, Freespire.

This mistake has a very simple (and equally obvious) basis. It's the pronunciation. 'o' in lose is pronounced exaclty like 'oo' in loose, choose and many other words. So people spell it 'loose', because they feel there's something missing in 'lose' (oh sweet irony), or they wrongly see it as a past tense form. That's how undereducation works. Oh well.

Actually that's how etymological spelling works. I always spell lose 'loose', because that way it makes most sense no matter whether it's also supposed to be right. It's not undereducation, it's just plain healthy reason.

English spelling is great that way: e.g. "bow" (part of a ship) and "bow" (used to fire an arrow) are prounounced differenty, but "bow" (ship again) and "bough" (part of a tree) are pronounced the same. "Through" does not rhyme with "trough" however, and neither of them rhymes with "bough"

Basically English is an awful mish-mash of a language, with spelling rules from French, Saxon and Latin, which were not fully codified till the release of the first dictionary in the 1700s.

That first dictionary caused a lot of fuss too. For example until its publication no-one pronounced the "h" at the start of words such as "hotel", "historic", "hour", "herb" and so on, as this was the way things worked in French. An awful muddle ensued when people released those h's were there. "Hour" stayed as it was, but the 'h' in "herb" got pronouced (except in America, where the old pronounciation remained). "Hotel" and "historic" were even more muddled. To this day, half the presenters on TV pronounce the 'h' in "historic" and the other half don't. It can be "a historic event" or "an historic occasion" depending on how they feel on the day.

Incidentally "lose" and "loose", for those non-English speakers, are pronounced differently, the first ends with a Z sound, the other ends in a hard S sound.

It's a wonderful language: I think I read somewhere that English speakers have one of the worst records for accidental misspellings in the world because of all this confusion :-/